13 comments:

What did you expect? Trump says "they're rapists, they bring crime, they bring drugs and some, I assume, are good people" and he becomes the potential Republic presidential nominee by a landslide. Just what did you think these characters were?

I agree with Trump 100% on this issue. Ranchers along the southern border have been pleading with the federal govt for years to stop the flow of criminals and drugs to no avail. Perhaps building a wall violates some ideal of anarchism or Libertarianism, however, I do not wish to see the US become the next Germany, France, Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc., with massive numbers of unvetted refugees pouring in from Muslim countries. Nor do I want to see the flow of Mexicans across the border in order to take advantage of "free" healthcare (emergency rooms, social programs, etc...) system the US as to offer. As Trump says "Either we have a country or we don't." While Germany and France decay into a state of total chaos from political correct acceptance, tolerance, or whatever you'd like to call it, we in the US must consider the notion that diversity is a double edged sword and some cultures are simply not compatible. I see nothing wrong with securing our borders - something the George W. Obama administration has failed us on - and deporting 11 million people. Either we have a country or we don't.

What a crock. Mexico has emergency rooms and free healthcare. People don't travel to the United States to find free healthcare, they risk everything they have to come to work in the US.

─ "Either we have a country or we don't." ─

How is the existence of the country contingent upon creating an insular society by force? That makes NO sense.

─ in the US must consider the notion that diversity is a double edged sword ─

Yes. Yes. You like your culture pure. Those pesky tacos!

─ I see nothing wrong with securing our borders [...] and deporting 11 million people. ─

Of course you don't. You're an economic ignoramus. Those of us who understand economics also understand that displacing 11 million people who make about 6% of the workforce would have enormous consequences to the economy in terms of lost production and loss of retail.

Humans are guided by reason and emotion. Emotionally, I do not want to live amongst foreigners. I do not want to hear 100 different languages every day. We have nothing in common with the invaders in terms of history, humor, standards of behavior etc. so there is no sense of community. Hatred is not a correct description of my feeling - its a realistic recognition of differences.

"Invaders"? Give me a break. If I marry a Ukrainian girl and bring her over, is she ipso facto an 'invader'? Are people who live in peace, rent or buy a dwelling and are productive, invaders?

─ Hatred is not a correct description of my feeling ─

Never ascribe to malice what can be explained by simple paranoia. In other words: perhaps you're right and your thinking process is not guided by 'hatred'... After all, a person who thinks immigrant are 'invaders'... Well, take your Thorazine, Marmite.

─So basically you are saying that homogenous states are prohibited under libertarianism─

Libertarianism is the political philosophy that holds total individual freedom as the greatest goal worth achieving. That means: libertarians don't believe in states, Matt. The State is the antithesis of individual freedom and the sovereignty of the person. Homogeneous or not, the state is not compatible with individual freedom and libertarians would not believe that one is necessary. I certainly don't.

I don't mind if undocumented workers stay as long as they are not the recipents of documented welfare benefits that were taken out of my pocket and toward which they typically don't contribute. There were not government handouts during periods of mass immigration decades ago, and the only folks that got seriously riled up about it were the unions wanting to keep wages high by preventing lower-skilled workers entry into the labor market.